In 40 years of Earth Day celebrations the Earth is still here

Today marks the 40^th Anniversary of Earth Day. The day that we are suppose to be aware of our non-stewardship of Mother Earth will lead to our downfall. When Earth Day started 40 years ago several predictions were made to help promote the cause. Chris Baker, morning talk show host on 100.3 FM, placed these statements made by Earth Day predictors on his blog today of which he obtained from reason.com:

"We have about five more years at the outside to do something."
• Kenneth Watt, ecologist

"Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind."
• George Wald, Harvard Biologist

"We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation."
• Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist

"Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction."
• New York Times editorial, the day after the first Earth Day

"Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"It is already too late to avoid mass starvation."
• Denis Hayes, chief organizer for Earth Day

"Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine."
• Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

"Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half…."
• Life Magazine, January 1970

"At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it's only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable."
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

"Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone."
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

"We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones."
• Martin Litton, Sierra Club director

"By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won't be any more crude oil. You'll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill 'er up, buddy,' and he'll say, `I am very sorry, there isn't any.'"
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

"Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."
• Sen. Gaylord Nelson

"The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age."
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

Now the scare tactics have been used in recent years to push for tougher gasoline standards, cleaner coal, and the use of alternative fuel sources. Debate has raged over the Al Gore's global warming mantra while hackers attempted to provide evidence of data manipulation. It is interesting to read these statements and compare them to some of the more recent conversation on global warming and man's dire need to curb greenhouse gases. The question is did any of these predictions come true? I do not see people in New York, LA, Chicago or Miami wearing gas masks to walk around. I just filled up my car, paid $2.81 a gallon, yesterday even though Kenneth Watt claimed by 2000 we'd be on the brink of having none; it's 2010.

Don't get me wrong I am not advocating the raping of Mother Earth. It does make sense for us to look for cheaper, cleaner ways of producing energy. If we did not move society forward we'd all be stuck riding horses still to get around. We do need to be good stewards of Mother Earth or she will erupt another volcano and more than likely it will be bigger than the one in Iceland; bye bye California. Take time toward to honor Mother Earth and the bounty she offers us. At the same time be aware of the global warming craze or our children will be looking back in 40 years talking about all the dire predictions as noted above.

DeMint sees DC Snow as Divine Intervention

The Washington D.C. is still digging out from weekend snow as more snow is on its way. The snow is piling up so much that the House of Representatives have postponed all activities for the rest of the week. You ask why I bring this up. Well one Senator is having fun with the recent and pending snow storms. That Senator is Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and he mentioned that, "It's going to keep snowing in DC until Al Gore cries 'uncle'". While the comment is made tongue-in-cheek it does beg the question on if manmade Global Warming is real or is it simply the Earth rolls in cycles. For if the world is experiencing Global Warming due to man's intervention to the point of tipping out of control, why then are we seeing cold and snow? Shouldn't we be experiencing unseasonably warm weather?

Last week President Obama unveiled his budget and part of the change taking place is the role of NASA. If President Obama gets his way, NASA scrap space exploration for whether diagnostics. Why on Earth are we not looking for ways to expand space exploration? If the data is correct and man has created an environment where Mother Earth is pushed to the brink of disaster then would it not make sense to find habitable planets or moons? Again I wonder why we do not have a definitive debate man's intervention on Global Warming versus the Mother Earths natural cycle. Can we finally agree to sit down and discuss Global Warming without a political, social, or ideological agenda and debate the topic on the data that has not been tainted?

Haiti rescue efforts displays the true nature of the American spirit

A few days ago a 7.0 magnitude earthquake demolished the isle of Haiti resulting in tremendous damage and leaving hundreds of thousand people dead. Within 24 hours of the earthquake and vast devastation, President Obama held a press conference to address the situation and lay out a plan to help those affected by Mother Nature's assault on Haiti. Part of that plan was the White House establishment of a link for people to donate money: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/01/13/help-haiti Along with UNICEF and the Red Cross other private organizations are getting involved. Some examples of non-government aid include $5M of cash donated by Digicel Group, Bank of America donating $1M, Home Depot giving $100K to the Red Cross, Lowe's giving $1M to the Red Cross, and Abbott Laboratories donating $1M as well.

I blog today about the situation facing the Haitian people not because of the timing of President Obama's speech or the potential use of taxpayer money to rebuild portions of Haiti while America mires in a recession; rather to take a moment to reflect on the generosity of the American spirit. While not every American will donate money or offer other assistance to those in Haiti, the American spirit to rally for a cause is on full display for the world. Despite being targeted by some in the Middle East for destruction or being viewed as an arrogant society no one can deny the compassion embedded within the fabric of the American spirit. Where else in the world will a society of private, free citizens donate time and money to assist people around the world in a time of need?

Take a moment to reflect on the American spirit and ask yourself, "Is there something I can do more to make the United States a better place to live?" The impact on the American society of Haiti will wane as rebuilding efforts continue but that should not stop our society from being engaged. Last year citizens all over the United States exercised their right to assembly as they attempted to shed light on the expansion of government and the out of control spending. The groups called for smaller government and lower taxes. Instead of being touted as an example of the America spirit it was painted as angry white men gathering to spew their racist hatred for President Obama.

As we will see in the coming days the donations raised for Haiti will come from private citizens and corporations. Granted the United States government will print, I believe the amount is $80M, money to help rebuild Haiti. The money used by the Federal Government is not taxpayer money, at least not yet, because our government is spending money it does not have. In the end taxpayers will have to make up the difference. With making up that difference a harsh reality will run contrary to the American spirit. Jobs, freedoms, and liberties will be compromised through higher taxes and the devaluation of the American dollar. I bring this up on the heal of the earthquake that devastated Haiti because we have an earthquake of our own brewing in Washington D.C.

Not a physical earthquake but an earthquake that will create greater damage to the country that is the land of the free and the home of the brave. As you donate, say a prayer, or watch the rescue efforts in Haiti keep in mind that our politicians in Washington D.C. are hoping you stay distracted as they continue to strip our freedoms away through increase government spending, taxation, and control over all aspects of our life.

Developing Nations: Moral Obligation or None of America’s concern

Last week President Obama addressed the group meeting in Copenhagen on Climate Change debate. President Obama challenged the group, "So the question before us is no longer the nature of the challenge – the question is our capacity to meet it." I disagree with Obama on the nature of our challenge as recent studies on CO2 effects are not as the climate change group believes it to be. The recent study on Aspen trees displayed positive effects on tree growth and Dr. Park noted that the oceans with adequate forestation and biomass are absorbing excess CO2. To me it appears that Mother Earth is doing was she always does; finds balance. Now, this does not mean that we are not absolved from making it easier on Mother Earth.

Deforestation trends needs to be reversed. President Obama continued his apology tour when he said, "As the world's largest economy and the world's second-larger emitter, America bears our share of responsibility in addressing climate change, and we intend to meet that responsibility." Does that responsibility mean raiding our coffers in giving developing countries $100 billion? If the Obama is serious about America doing our part then let's do it. We are not responsible for developing countries nor are we obligated. That being said, let's focus internally and implement a new energy policy where nuclear power is front and center. President Obama alluded that "changing the way that we produce and use energy is essential to America's economic future – that it will create millions of new jobs, power new industry, keep us competitive and spark new innovation." While Obama is correct that the "green" push will create new industry and innovation it will only replace current energy jobs at a rate of 1 to 2. On the surface moving toward solar and wind power will create new jobs, it will result in a net loss as per a recent report from King Juan Carlos University (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2PHwqAs7BS0).

The result of Obama showing up in Copenhagen cost Americans $10 billion a year pledge to assist developing countries and a non-binding agreement among countries to reduce carbon emissions. Last week I brought up the point that humans contribute, personally, more than the total fossil fuel burned on an annual basis. Since humans exhale more CO2 collectively than fossil fuels then why on Earth would we want to help developing countries as the more industry a country obtains the larger the population required to run it. People who peddle climate change say that Earth is on an unsustainable path to a reducing food supply and drought. Okay, so again, why do we, as Americans, want to assist developing nations? Increasing the world's population will only place more burdens on our food and water supply. Or is there a moral obligation on the part of America? I do applaud President Obama for going to Copenhagen and not turning over the keys though.